Cries of politics over AG's role in probe present new challenge for Christie

By MICHAEL PHILLIS

State house Bureau |

The Record

A lawsuit in which a former prosecutor accuses the Attorney General’s Office of having fired him for political reasons is reaching a critical juncture more than three years later.

Ben Barlyn, the former prosecutor, contends that he was dismissed in September 2010 because he objected to the quashing of an indictment against three local officials in Hunterdon County. Barlyn, who insists that the indictment was thrown out for political reasons, asked an appeals court last month to order the release of documents he said could help substantiate his claims against the state.

Barlyn was part of a group of lawyers in the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office who investigated the local sheriff, Deborah Trout, and two of her subordinates between 2008 and 2010. The three officials were charged with a total of 43 criminal counts, but the charges were dropped in 2010 after the Attorney General’s Office took over the case.

Local prosecutors, angry at what they viewed as improper actions by the Attorney General’s Office, part of the Christie administration, ignited a legal battle that is still being waged more than three years later. The Christie administration denies any political involvement in the case, but Barlyn hopes to prevail in the suit by showing how politics entered into an arena — law enforcement — that is supposed to be free of such influence.

The facts of the case are knotty and disputed, with resentments still lingering. But it is reaching a critical juncture at a time when two of Governor Christie’s political associates face allegations that politics played a role in their decision to shut down access lanes to the George Washington Bridge in September, causing huge traffic jams in Fort Lee.

During the initial investigation of the Hunterdon sheriff by prosecutors in that county, one of Trout’s subordinates, Undersheriff Michael Russo, was quoted in a local newspaper saying that Governor Christie would step in and “have this whole thing thrown out.” Russo later denied having said this.

Along with the quote, a photo of Christie with one of the indicted officials and friendly emails between Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno and Trout provide evidence of a connection, Barlyn asserts.

“The crux of my complaint is that I was fired because I publicly complained [that] the dismissal of the indictments was improper,” Barlyn said. “There was no legal basis that could possibly justify dismissing all 43 counts.”

A spokesman for the governor said, however, that there is no evidence of any connection between Trout and the Christie administration.

“A one-time photo from an unknown political event does not constitute a ‘friendship’ or relationship; certainly Trout was not a ‘Christie ally’ in any meaning of the word,” said Christie spokes­man Michael Drewniak. “As the governor said to me one time, ‘I wouldn’t know her if she walked into my office right now.’Ÿ”

Specifically, Barlyn is seeking access to the grand jury transcripts that led to Trout’s indictment. He said the transcripts would verify that the prosecution did not make mistakes; the Attorney General’s Office has said this was the reason they decided to drop the charges.

A representative for the Attorney General’s Office said they did not comment on pending suits.

In Barlyn’s recent filing with the court, he argued that the transcripts have direct bearing on his claim that his prosecution was solid. The state insisted that releasing the documents would harm the secret grand jury process. Barlyn’s appeal is scheduled to be heard in appellate court later this month.

In the original indictment, Trout was accused of failing to check the backgrounds of some new hires — two of whom turned out to have questionable pasts. Russo, for example, had a history with a quasi-police wing of a dysfunctional chapter of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Trout was also said to have asked subordinates to sign loyalty oaths, among the charges.

Trout and Russo’s lawyer did not comment on the allegations. Trout, Russo and the third official who was indicted, John Falat Jr., no longer work in the Sheriff’s Office.

Despite requests that it get involved in the early stages of the local prosecutors’ investigation, the Attorney General’s Office stayed away until the indictment was made public.

At that point, the Attorney General’s Office appointed Deputy Attorney General Dermot O’Grady to temporarily head the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office. Some of his own staff filled the jobs of longtime local prosecutors and dismissed the case against the three Hunterdon officials.

The process by which the staff from the Attorney General’s Office decided to dismiss the indictment caused an uproar in the Prosecutor’s Office in the summer of 2010.

One of the detectives on the case, Kenneth Rowe, said in a June 2010 email that he understood state officials were asking for all of the local prosecutors’ evidence. “In my 28 years … I have never turned over original evidence to another agency unless they were actually going to continue the investigation,” he wrote.

Prosecutor William McGovern wrote an email to O’Grady, the deputy attorney general, asking what his plans were for the prosecution. McGovern asked whether the plan was “to continue leaving me in the dark and out of the discussions.”

In another email, Rowe said he thought the Attorney General’s Office was acting as a defense attorney for the sheriff — an unusual course of action.

Rowe said in the email that he was beginning to believe the comment attributed to Russo in the local newspaper, when he was reported to have said that Christie would step in to have the indictments dismissed. “Why the interest in this small time case?” Rowe wrote.

Copies of the emails were provided to The Record.

In August 2010, the Division of Criminal Justice wrote a letter explaining why it decided not to pursue charges against Trout and the two other officials.

“The state’s motion to dismiss is based upon legal and factual deficiencies in the indictments against all three defendants,” the letter read. “Errors in the presentation of these matters to the grand jury have resulted in defective indictments.”

In general, the letter said, charges of failing to conduct a background check did not qualify as a knowing violation of Trout’s oath of office. Her decision to ask for loyalty oaths was more of an indication of bad management, not criminal activity, according to the letter.

Four of the grand jurors said separately that they were unhappy the indictment was dropped, The New York Times reported.

Some prosecutors quit the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office, saying they objected to the way the Attorney General’s Office had handled the case against the former sheriff.

Barlyn hopes the grand jury transcripts will vindicate the fight he has waged for three years. With his legal career at least temporarily halted, Barlyn obtained a teaching license and is working in a middle school in Bucks County, Pa.

Cries of politics over AG's role in probe present new challenge for Christie

By MICHAEL PHILLIS

State house Bureau |

The Record

A lawsuit in which a former prosecutor accuses the Attorney General’s Office of having fired him for political reasons is reaching a critical juncture more than three years later.

Ben Barlyn, the former prosecutor, contends that he was dismissed in September 2010 because he objected to the quashing of an indictment against three local officials in Hunterdon County. Barlyn, who insists that the indictment was thrown out for political reasons, asked an appeals court last month to order the release of documents he said could help substantiate his claims against the state.

Barlyn was part of a group of lawyers in the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office who investigated the local sheriff, Deborah Trout, and two of her subordinates between 2008 and 2010. The three officials were charged with a total of 43 criminal counts, but the charges were dropped in 2010 after the Attorney General’s Office took over the case.

Local prosecutors, angry at what they viewed as improper actions by the Attorney General’s Office, part of the Christie administration, ignited a legal battle that is still being waged more than three years later. The Christie administration denies any political involvement in the case, but Barlyn hopes to prevail in the suit by showing how politics entered into an arena — law enforcement — that is supposed to be free of such influence.

The facts of the case are knotty and disputed, with resentments still lingering. But it is reaching a critical juncture at a time when two of Governor Christie’s political associates face allegations that politics played a role in their decision to shut down access lanes to the George Washington Bridge in September, causing huge traffic jams in Fort Lee.

During the initial investigation of the Hunterdon sheriff by prosecutors in that county, one of Trout’s subordinates, Undersheriff Michael Russo, was quoted in a local newspaper saying that Governor Christie would step in and “have this whole thing thrown out.” Russo later denied having said this.

Along with the quote, a photo of Christie with one of the indicted officials and friendly emails between Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno and Trout provide evidence of a connection, Barlyn asserts.

“The crux of my complaint is that I was fired because I publicly complained [that] the dismissal of the indictments was improper,” Barlyn said. “There was no legal basis that could possibly justify dismissing all 43 counts.”

A spokesman for the governor said, however, that there is no evidence of any connection between Trout and the Christie administration.

“A one-time photo from an unknown political event does not constitute a ‘friendship’ or relationship; certainly Trout was not a ‘Christie ally’ in any meaning of the word,” said Christie spokes­man Michael Drewniak. “As the governor said to me one time, ‘I wouldn’t know her if she walked into my office right now.’Ÿ”

Specifically, Barlyn is seeking access to the grand jury transcripts that led to Trout’s indictment. He said the transcripts would verify that the prosecution did not make mistakes; the Attorney General’s Office has said this was the reason they decided to drop the charges.

A representative for the Attorney General’s Office said they did not comment on pending suits.

In Barlyn’s recent filing with the court, he argued that the transcripts have direct bearing on his claim that his prosecution was solid. The state insisted that releasing the documents would harm the secret grand jury process. Barlyn’s appeal is scheduled to be heard in appellate court later this month.

In the original indictment, Trout was accused of failing to check the backgrounds of some new hires — two of whom turned out to have questionable pasts. Russo, for example, had a history with a quasi-police wing of a dysfunctional chapter of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Trout was also said to have asked subordinates to sign loyalty oaths, among the charges.

Trout and Russo’s lawyer did not comment on the allegations. Trout, Russo and the third official who was indicted, John Falat Jr., no longer work in the Sheriff’s Office.

Despite requests that it get involved in the early stages of the local prosecutors’ investigation, the Attorney General’s Office stayed away until the indictment was made public.

At that point, the Attorney General’s Office appointed Deputy Attorney General Dermot O’Grady to temporarily head the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office. Some of his own staff filled the jobs of longtime local prosecutors and dismissed the case against the three Hunterdon officials.

The process by which the staff from the Attorney General’s Office decided to dismiss the indictment caused an uproar in the Prosecutor’s Office in the summer of 2010.

One of the detectives on the case, Kenneth Rowe, said in a June 2010 email that he understood state officials were asking for all of the local prosecutors’ evidence. “In my 28 years … I have never turned over original evidence to another agency unless they were actually going to continue the investigation,” he wrote.

Prosecutor William McGovern wrote an email to O’Grady, the deputy attorney general, asking what his plans were for the prosecution. McGovern asked whether the plan was “to continue leaving me in the dark and out of the discussions.”

In another email, Rowe said he thought the Attorney General’s Office was acting as a defense attorney for the sheriff — an unusual course of action.

Rowe said in the email that he was beginning to believe the comment attributed to Russo in the local newspaper, when he was reported to have said that Christie would step in to have the indictments dismissed. “Why the interest in this small time case?” Rowe wrote.

Copies of the emails were provided to The Record.

In August 2010, the Division of Criminal Justice wrote a letter explaining why it decided not to pursue charges against Trout and the two other officials.

“The state’s motion to dismiss is based upon legal and factual deficiencies in the indictments against all three defendants,” the letter read. “Errors in the presentation of these matters to the grand jury have resulted in defective indictments.”

In general, the letter said, charges of failing to conduct a background check did not qualify as a knowing violation of Trout’s oath of office. Her decision to ask for loyalty oaths was more of an indication of bad management, not criminal activity, according to the letter.

Four of the grand jurors said separately that they were unhappy the indictment was dropped, The New York Times reported.

Some prosecutors quit the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office, saying they objected to the way the Attorney General’s Office had handled the case against the former sheriff.

Barlyn hopes the grand jury transcripts will vindicate the fight he has waged for three years. With his legal career at least temporarily halted, Barlyn obtained a teaching license and is working in a middle school in Bucks County, Pa.